Feeding Dependency, Starving Democracy: USAID Policies in Haiti

From Grassroots International, 6 March 1997, 8:26 PM

CARE has been 'helping' people in the Northwest for
decades. But each year, the misery of the people of the Northwest
increases. What is the real impact of this aid? To make people more
dependent, more vulnerable, more on the margins?...The aid is not
given in such a way as to give the people responsibility, to make them
less dependent....This is what you call ‘commercializing’
poverty....The people's misery should not be marketed....

Samuel Madisten, Haitian Senator

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

In 1996 Grassroots International began an extensive six-month
research and investigation project in Haiti. Our primary objective was
to understand how programs funded by the U.S. government are affecting
food security in Haiti. Given the massive scope of those programs
since the restoration of democratic rule three years ago, our goal was
to see for ourselves what impact that programs administered by the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) were having on
Haitis poor, particularly small farmers and peasants.

The research was conducted by Laurie Richardson, a Grassroots
International Research Associate and writer based in Port-au-Prince.
Fluent in Haitian Creole, she has been studying the impact of U.S.
policy on Haitis pro-democracy movement since 1991. For this project
Ms. Richardson traveled throughout Haitis Northwest and Artibonite
regions, interviewing hundreds of peasants, members of Parliament,
economists, government officials, community organizers, development
workers, agronomists, and representatives of international private
voluntary organizations.

Extensive bibliographic research including some conducted at the USAID
library in Port-au-Prince allowed us to study the philosophy behind
USAID programs in Haiti, particularly food-aid and jobs-creation
programs.

WHAT WE FOUND Despite glowing reports from USAID that its field
programs in Haiti are succeeding, our research found that those
programs are not furthering equitable development, nor are they
increasing food security. Three years ago the United States sent
troops to Haiti with the stated intention of restoring democracy. The
sad reality is that current international aid policies are robbing the
Haitian people of independence and the very community initiative that
is the cornerstone of autonomy. Most troubling, in this hemispheres
hungriest nation, U.S. policies are undermining, instead of enhancing,
the ability of Haitian farmers to grow and market their goods.

Grassroots Internationals research documents how U.S. government
policies and aid programs interfere with the production of local food
crops and create a dangerous dependence on U.S. food imports.
Grassroots International also found serious problems with food aid and
other assistance programs, and the non- governmental organizations
(NGOs) implementing them. They are, in fact, derailing community-based
organizations that are the real engines of progress and Haitis only
hope for sustainable development.

Foreign aid programs and the free-market economic policies that they
are conditioned upon are exacerbating social tensions in Haiti, as was
shown by the anti-austerity strikes in mid-January of this year.
Ultimately, such development strategies are threatening to undermine
Haitis chance to build democracy by driving a wedge between the
government of President Ren Prval and the Haitian people.

These policies are also contributing to the exodus of Haitians from
rural areas. As the World Bank stated in a recent draft strategy
paper, the rural majority has only two possibilities: work in the
industrial or service sector, or emigrate.

SUMMARY FINDINGS

Throughout Haiti, peasant farmers, agronomists, economists, and
elected officials are criticizing USAID programs as being largely
detrimental to the long-term ability of the nation to feed its
population.

Grassroots Internationals primary findings about U.S. government
policies are:

1. Drastically reduced tariffs on imported food which the U.S.
government has insisted upon as a condition for aid are flooding Haiti
with cheap food, undercutting prices for locally grown products.

Throughout the rural areas surveyed by Grassroots International,
farmers reported tremendous difficulty competing with cheap,
subsidized foodstuffs imported under new tariff schemes. In the case
of rice, for example, dramatic reductions in tariffs since 1995 have
made imported rice cheaper than before, undermining Haitian rice
farmers. Not only do these imports reduce the price that Haitian
farmers receive for their rice, but they also depress the prices they
receive for other key cereals, such as millet and corn. Spiraling food
imports also consume much-needed hard currency; rice purchases now eat
up 15 percent of Haitis import budget.

2. The U.S.-based NGOs that carry out most USAID programs do not
adequately consult or coordinate with local, regional and national
Haitian government authorities.

Grassroots Internationals survey revealed consistent complaints that
foreign aid programs, generally implemented by private agencies such
as CARE and the Pan American Development Foundation (PADF), largely
bypass relevant Haitian governmental entities, often putting resulting
development projects at odds with stated national, regional, and local
priorities.

Given the size and scope of international aid in Haiti approximately
60 percent of the Haitian governments budget comes from external
sources this not only produces ineffective development programs but
also undercuts the very democratic process the U.S. government says it
wants to build.

3. USAID programs do not respond to Haitis stated priority of
revitalizing national agricultural production; only 4.3 percent of the
USAIDs four-year US$ 443 million aid package is destined for
agricultural development.

Although Haitis government and community organizations have clearly
stated that their top development priority is revitalizing
agriculture, USAID is devoting only 4.3 percent of its four-year
budget to agricultural projects. By contrast, food aid makes up 13
percent. The failure to invest in agricultural development further
weakens the efforts of Haitian farmers to increase domestic
production.

Food security analysts acknowledge that massive deliveries of U.S.
wheat to Haitis government under the Public Law (PL) 480 Title III
program drive down prices for rice, millet, and other cereals in
Haiti. Grassroots Internationals research found evidence supporting
widespread complaints that PL 480 Title II food aid aid distributed by
U.S. NGOs, also undercuts the prices for locally produced
staples. This has discouraged Haitian farmers from growing basic
grains, increasing Haitis dependence on imported food.

This well-documented phenomenon was clearly evident in the communities
Grassroots International surveyed. The massive distribution of surplus
U.S. wheat has fostered a taste for products that can only be produced
with this imported staple. As Haitians incorporate these products into
their diets, growers of local grains such as corn which grows well in
Haitis mountainous terrain have seen shrinking demand for their
products. This breeds dependency, undermines food security and creates
an unsustainable reliance on imported food.

6. Private aid agencies consistently operated jobs-creation programs
in rural areas at key planting and harvesting times, pulling people
out of their fields with the lure of relatively high short-term wages.

Peasant farmers surveyed by Grassroots International repeatedly
complained about temporary NGO-supervised employment projects.
Short-term projects were run by PADF in rural areas during periods of
peak agricultural activity. The relatively high wages paid by these
projects lured farmers and farm laborers out of their fields. This in
turn reduced the amount of land planted, left ripe crops rotting in
the fields, and increased the labor costs for those farmers who tried
to compete with wage levels paid in the jobs programs.

Grassroots International also found that many of these infrastructure
projects were poorly designed and had little long-term impact. In one
case, local residents were paid to dig drainage ditches during rainy
season. Runoffs from the rains filled the ditches with rocks and soil
almost as soon as the project was completed.

Camille Chalmers, head of the Haitian Platform for Alternative
Development (one of Grassroots Internationals partner organizations),
observed, We saw with our own eyes the quantity of rice which is ripe
but rotting in the fields because the peasants dont have enough money
or cant find people to work in the fields. [This] creates the paradox
of rice rotting in the fields in a country where there is hunger.

Over and over, Grassroots International heard complaints from local
peasant and community leaders that USAID-funded programs for jobs
creation are changing Haitians attitudes about community work. These
programs pay people for work previously performed out of a sense of
concern for their villages. Grassroots International also heard
consistent reports of poor families and small farmers who began to
rely heavily on food aid distributions and paid less attention to
increasing their own food production.

Instead of spending two or three years teaching people to fish, [these
NGOs] prefer to give them a fish every day....The people who are
working to produce...come to the conclusion that it is better to go
get a plate of food, a fish, instead of going out to fish themselves,
notes Haitian Senator Samuel Madisten from the rice-growing Artibonite
region.

8. Private aid agencies frequently fail to consult or work with local
community organizations; instead they either directly implement
projects themselves or work closely with discredited local elites.

Though most development professionals acknowledge that the involvement
of local communities is essential to the success of any development
project, U.S.- funded programs in Haiti regularly fail to consult with
or involve appropriate local leaders and organizations. In community
after community, Haitians painted a picture of U.S. aid workers as
outside experts who impose their own projects with little regard or
respect for local priorities or institutions.

More disturbing still, Grassroots International found a consistent
pattern of unsavory alliances between U.S. agencies and local elites
associated with the deposed military regime. The choice of such
partners by U.S. agencies not only produces ineffective development
projects but also destroys democracy at the local level by reinforcing
the power of undemocratic leaders at the expense of democratic,
community-based organizations.

THE ROLE OF U.S. AGENCIES

One of the most troubling findings of Grassroots Internationals
research was the consistently negative role played by the U.S. NGOs
responsible for implementing much of USAIDs Haiti program. The two
primary implementing agencies for food aid and jobs-creation programs
were CARE and PADF. Grassroots Internationals investigation revealed
consistent complaints about their role and their effectiveness.

The following flaws were of particular concern:

failure to consult with and involve local communities in the design,
implementation and evaluation of projects;

failure to identify correctly and respond to local needs;

failure to sufficiently monitor the impact and effectiveness of
projects and make needed changes;

frequent selection of Haitian counterparts who not only lack community
support but are closely associated with the former military
government; and

failure to coordinate with local and regional Haitian government
bodies, thereby creating projects at odds with stated Haitian
priorities.

At a time when U.S. foreign aid programs are under fire from
conservatives, the community of private aid agencies in the United
States has a particular obligation to ensure that all funds, whether
from taxpayers or private contributors, promote long-term,
community-based solutions to hunger. Projects must foster
self-reliance and community initiative, strengthen local democratic
institutions, and break cycles of dependency. The programs Grassroots
International reviewed in Haiti rarely contributed to these goals; in
many cases, they did the opposite.

Grassroots International, which as a matter of policy does not accept
U.S. government funds, believes that one of the strongest factors
contributing to private aid agencies ineffectiveness in Haiti is their
dependence on U.S. government funding for programs. This often leaves
private aid organizations more beholden to U.S. government policies
than they are to the communities they are trying to assist.

In Haiti, this has led CARE, PADF, and others to support projects that
are clearly undermining rather than contributing to Haitians
courageous and admirable efforts to achieve food security.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on its findings, Grassroots International recommends that the
U.S. government and U.S. agencies operating in Haiti adhere to one
basic principle: Aid policies and programs should support the goal of
enhancing Haitis food security by supporting, not undermining, Haitian
food producers.

Specifically, Grassroots International recommends that:

1. The U.S. government should not condition its aid to the Haitian
government on the implementation of policies that undermine Haitian
food producers and weaken the development of democratic institutions
in Haiti.

2. The U.S. government should end pressure on Haiti to reduce tariffs,
particularly on food. Haitian food producers should be protected from
subsidized U.S. imports while they rebuild their productive capacity.

3. Policies should cease to emphasize short-term emergency programs,
including jobs and food aid, in favor of long-term, small-scale
development.

4. All programs should be designed and carried out with the full
participation and approval of the affected communities, in ways that
strengthen Haitian organizations and institutions including the
Haitian government particularly at the local level.

5. Aid programs should support Haitian food producers by increasing
their access to:

land, by supporting a comprehensive land-reform program designed to
transfer quality, arable land to small farmers;

seeds, tools, and farm machinery to help recapitalize peasant
households; and

food storage and marketing support.

CONCLUSION

Haitians are a determined people. Their commitment to democracy is
tenacious. They have overthrown the tyrannical Duvalier dictatorship.
They have resisted the brutal attempt to halt their march toward
democracy, preventing the military coup from taking hold. Now, with
formal democracy restored, the Haitian people are increasingly
focusing their determination on building an economy and society that
responds first to the needs of the Haitian poor.

With appropriate support, Haitian farmers can increase production of
and access to affordable basic foodstuffs. Haitis people, the majority
of whom still make their living from the land, want desperately to
develop their own self-reliant communities and a nation that is not
dependent on foreign funds or food.

If the United States government and U.S. NGOs are truly committed to
building democracy in Haiti, they must rethink their current misguided
policies and practices, which are undermining both food security and
democracy in Haiti.